The Avengers vs X-Men: Days of Future Past

[KangConquers]

Gah! I completely spaced on Ruffalo. Don't know how I forgot him but yes, his Banner is fantastic.



I guess I like Lawrence better because I'm comparing Mystique's treatment to what they've done with Black Widow since they really are the only two female leads in superhero movies right now. I feel like in First Class they really set a good foundation for her that was greatly expanded in DOFP.

With Black Widow, the character is absolutely awesome but I still feel like we know next to nothing about her. They scratched the surface in The Avengers but then it felt like in The Winter Soldier she was just there to play the opposite to Cap and we never really dug deeper into the character. They've never made clear what her motivations are outside of being an Avenger or with SHIELD.

Maybe they'll explore more with her in AoU but I can't help but feel her character treatment was been left to the wayside in favor of the big four.

Lawrence did fine. I just felt given her extreme talent, she underwhelmed me.
This is someone who is talented enough that when Mcavoy or Fassbender are stealing a scene, she should be able to take it right back from them.

For the record, I generally don't like these threads because I always find myself bashing something I really like to defend something I love. Days of Future Past is a great comic book movie. It's my #3 CBM of this decade, behind Avengers and Winter Soldier. But Avengers was a cinematic event for that I'm still recovering from, and is possibly my favorite blockbuster of all time.

 

[jmc]

It has nothing to do with "not" being allowed to like a movie. That argument was never brought up. It's the level some go to in order to detract from one movie in order prop up another. They're both clearly good movies, albeit I wasn't as enamored with it as many were ..... but I'm not going to sit there and exaggerate its faults in order to defend my favored franchise.

I mean c'mon .... the Avengers "hollow"? Really?

I can see how one could see it as hollow given it doesn't really matter who the villain is, what his plan is of even who the heroes are to some degree. Simplistic is the word I'd use because I do think the film has heart, but if someone sees it as hollow I can't really argue against them because it is a fairly one note movie that lacks substance.

 

[Rock Sexton]

I can see how one could see it as hollow given it doesn't really matter who the villain is, what his plan is of even who the heroes are to some degree. Simplistic is the word I'd use because I do think the film has heart, but if someone sees it as hollow I can't really argue against them because it is a fairly one note movie that lacks substance.

Why doesn't it matter who the villain is? Loki literally takes them all down in the early going ..... scattering them and making them question what they're actually trying to accomplish. The Chitauri were not going to do that on their own.

Just because it doesn't have James McAvoy spewing spit as he shouts "I don't want your FUTCHA!!!!" doesn't make it a hollow film or substance-less ..... the substance is in the teamwork building. The substance is in the banter between the heroes. You seem to forget the Avengers aren't comprised of two warring factions like Xavier's X-Men and Magneto's. That's where a lot of the emotional tension comes from.

It's not like DOFP is a multi-note movie. 90% of the time its speechifying and the same "war on mutant" theme we got in how many other X-related films?

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

Complaining about an X-men movie having the same civil rights theme is like complaining about having a movie where the Avengers save the world.

But DOFP was definitely multi-note. It had moments that were incredibly thrilling, tragic, hopeful, and humorous.

Avengers had a fair share of nerdgasms but it wasn't the rollercoaster of raw emotion DOFP was.

 

[Rock Sexton]

Complaining about an X-men movie having the same civil rights theme is like complaining about having a movie where the Avengers save the world.

But DOFP was definitely multi-note. It had moments that were incredibly thrilling, tragic, hopeful, and humorous.

Avengers had a fair share of nerdgasms but it wasn't the rollercoaster of raw emotion DOFP was.

That "raw" emotion you speak of, a tad bit exaggerated in my opinion .... at least based on my experience watching it. It was funny early up until the end of that plane ride after grabbing Magneto. After that is was gobbing heaps of speechification. There's no doubt more of an emotional angle than in Avengers ...... but that's not what Avengers was going for.

Avengers was multi-note with it's wit, humor, team struggle, and team building. Not to mention its action was better than DOFP's.

Btw, there can be X-Men movies without having to play the "war on mutant" card every single time. That's why I'm more looking forward to AOA.

 

[jmc]

Why doesn't it matter who the villain is? Loki literally takes them all down in the early going ..... scattering them and making them question what they're actually trying to accomplish. The Chitauri were not going to do that on there own.

Just because it doesn't have James McAvoy spewing spit as he shouts "I don't want your FUTCHA!!!!" doesn't make it a hollow film or substance-less ..... the substance is in the teamwork building. The substance is in the banter between the heroes. You seem to forget the Avengers aren't comprised of two warring factions like Xavier's X-Men and Magneto's. That's where a lot of the emotional tension comes from.

It's not like DOFP is a multi-note movie. 90% of the time its speechifying and the same "war on mutant" theme we got in how many other X-related films?

Because who the villain is isn't important. Lets not make out Loki's plan went beyond anything more than using a McGuffin for world domination, it's a one note objective that could have been given to any villain. There's no specific reason it needed to be Loki as the villain in that movie, his role is to be the antagonist. That is where some people might find Avengers hollow because ultimately it paints with a very broad brush than what X-Men does. X-men has something that Avengers doesn't have, a genuine emotional core, and frankly Avengers might never be able to obtain that given the nature of the movies and how little the characters interact with one and other on screen in between team ups.

 

[def28]

I'm still waiting for 80% of the X-Men to interact with eachother. Avengers interacted plenty. That's actually a big reason why I give that flick the upperhand.

 

[Rock Sexton]

Because the who the villain is isn't important. Lets not make out Loki's plan went beyond anything more than using a McGuffin for world domination, it's a one note objective that could have been given to any villain. There's no specific reason it needed to be Loki as the villain in that movie, his role is to be the antagonist. That is where some people might find Avengers hollow because ultimately it paints with a very broad brush than what X-Men does. X-men has something that Avengers doesn't have, a genuine emotional core, and frankly Avengers might never be able to obtain that given the nature of the movies and how little the characters interact with one and other on screen in between team ups.

And Bolivar Trask's role isn't the same "we must fightz tha mutantz" role seen in practically every X-related film? Speaking of Mcguffins, let's not even get into Kitty's sudden ability to send people back through time or a spontaneous mutant serum which cures paralysis. Ohhhhhh and Mystique's role in the entire film wrapped around her DNA.

Loki needed to be in the film because he was the brother of Thor and hell-bent of ruling a kingdom of his own ..... the very place his brother was sworn to protect and the home of the object of his affection.

In regards to emotional core it's being developed. X-Men has had over a decade to work on it. Yet, there was plenty of character interaction in Avengers, it was practically the whole point of the movie ..... how they figure out how to get along in order to stop impending doom.

 

[jmc]

Being the brother of Thor is not a valid argument. What related to the story specifically in Avengers makes it important that Loki is the villain?

 

[Rock Sexton]

Being the brother of Thor is not a valid argument. What related to the story specifically in Avengers makes it important that Loki is the villain?

That is what helps make him important to the story. It was birthed in the first "Thor" movie .... his jealousy, his rage. You think the Chitauri were going to mastermind a way to break up the team and at times make them come to blows with each other? That's perfect for the God of Mischief.

 

[SuperT]

For the record, I generally don't like these threads because I always find myself bashing something I really like to defend something I love.

Oh, I completely agree with you here! I LOVED The Avengers but I just liked DOFP more.

Me defending it doesn't mean I think Avengers was crap - not even close.

 

[jmc]

That is what helps make him important to the story. It was birthed in the first "Thor" movie .... his jealousy, his rage. You think the Chitauri were going to mastermind a way to break up the team and at times make them come to blows with each other? That's perfect for the God of Mischief.

You are either are incapable of understanding the question that I'm asking or you're purposely not being objective because you don't like any criticism leveled towards Avengers or Marvel. Either way I give up.

 

[Whiskey Tango]

Hey, you guys know what's awesome? Taking two completely different films and starting pissing matches about them online! It's the funnest!

 

[SuperT]

I'm still waiting for 80% of the X-Men to interact with eachother. Avengers interacted plenty. That's actually a big reason why I give that flick the upperhand.

I would agree with this somewhat. The team interactions within the X-Men could definitely be improved upon next to The Avengers but I think the character interactions between Xavier/Magneto/Mystique/Beast in First Class and DOFP dwarf what was happening in The Avengers.

There's just more meat there between those characters than in The Avengers.

 

[Rock Sexton]

You are either are incapable of understanding the question that I'm asking or you're purposely not being objective because you don't like any criticism leveled towards Avengers or Marvel. Either way I give up.

I answered the question and in typical fashion you dramatically walk away. Bye bye JMC, good talk! t:

 

[Rock Sexton]

I would agree with this somewhat. The team interactions within the X-Men could definitely be improved upon next to The Avengers but I think the character interactions between Xavier/Magneto/Mystique/Beast in First Class and DOFP dwarf what was happening in The Avengers.

There's just more meat there between those characters than in The Avengers.

Beast was just along for the ride.

The emotional beats are there between Xavier/Magneto/Mystique because they've been interacting for how many films now? The Avengers can't force that kind of emotion yet ..... that's what A:AOU is for.

 

[SuperT]

Hey, you guys know what's awesome? Taking two completely different films and starting pissing matches about them online! It's the funnest!

 

[Rock Sexton]

Hey, you guys know what's awesome? Taking two completely different films and starting pissing matches about them online! It's the funnest!

Seriously the thread title should be changed to "Which movie appealed to you more". They really are two different kinds of CBM's.

 

[def28]

I would agree with this somewhat. The team interactions within the X-Men could definitely be improved upon next to The Avengers but I think the character interactions between Xavier/Magneto/Mystique/Beast in First Class and DOFP dwarf what was happening in The Avengers.

There's just more meat there between those characters than in The Avengers.

There were more personal and intimate conversations with DOFP among those characters, yeah. I guess since I spent so much time with all the MCU characters, the lack of emotionally deep subject matter when they meet up for the first time doesn't matter to me much. I felt I knew them all better, cause they have all had their personal time in their own flicks so I had the background with all their journeys, struggles and personalities.

I'm just kinda getting burnt out on not seeing these X characters other then Mags, Prof X and Wolverine do something character wise. I wasn't invested in this as much as others. Which was really a surprise to me being a huge fan of First Class and The Wolverine. Really couldn't stand the future scenes minus the Prof X meeting. To each their own, though. At least we got all these options nowadays on what to enjoy.

I just hope we get some solid Cyc, Storm, Jean and Gambit origin/character stuff in Apocalypse. Time to move to the team focus.

 

[SuperT]

Really couldn't stand the future scenes minus the Prof X meeting. To each their own, though. At least we got all these options nowadays on what to enjoy.

I agree with you here - the future scenes in DOFP were necessary because of the plot of the story, but not really anything I cared to see. The heart of the story was everything that happened during the 70's scenes.

That's part of the reason I'm annoyed to hear that they want to bring back the original cast for Apocalypse. Just focus on the damn cast in the 80's with Xavier, Magneto, Mystique, Beast and introduce Cykes, Jean and Storm again. That's all you really need.

 

[Rock Sexton]

I agree with you here - the future scenes in DOFP were necessary because of the plot of the story, but not really anything I cared to see. The heart of the story was everything that happened during the 70's scenes.

That's part of the reason I'm annoyed to hear that they want to bring back the original cast for Apocalypse. Just focus on the damn cast in the 80's with Xavier, Magneto, Mystique, Beast and introduce Cykes, Jean and Storm again. That's all you really need.

Makes me question how much faith they have in the new cast on their own.

I feel pretty much the same as you guys about the future scenes. Watching characters I wasn't familiar with die made me not care. For the life of me I couldn't figure out why the X-Men kept going after each sentinel by themselves.

 

[def28]

I agree with you here - the future scenes in DOFP were necessary because of the plot of the story, but not really anything I cared to see. The heart of the story was everything that happened during the 70's scenes.

That's part of the reason I'm annoyed to hear that they want to bring back the original cast for Apocalypse. Just focus on the damn cast in the 80's with Xavier, Magneto, Mystique, Beast and introduce Cykes, Jean and Storm again. That's all you really need.

Agreed.

I'm hoping it means for Horsemen if anything. Otherwise if it takes place in the past with an already crowded cast, I don't see the point. Your just gonna lose more of that focus that can go to character developing with the newly introduced A listers.

I feel pretty much the same as you guys about the future scenes. Watching characters I wasn't familiar with die made me not care. For the life of me I couldn't figure out why the X-Men kept going after each sentinel by themselves.

Yeah, I just didn't care. They couldn't really fight well, or strategize on top of it. Could have been alot cooler.

 

[SuperT]

Makes me question how much faith they have in the new cast on their own.

Yep. They're basically saying they have no faith in the First Class set of actors. At this point, McAvoy, Fassbender and Lawrence can sell a movie by themselves, not to mention that not taking into account whoever they end up casting for Cyclops, Jean, and Storm.

Other than Jackman, it's time to put the original trilogy cast to rest and bring in the new blood. DOFP basically set that up, it's now in the hands of Fox and Bryan Singer on moving forward with that decision.

 

[def28]

Other than Jackman, it's time to put the original trilogy cast to rest and bring in the new blood. DOFP basically set that up, it's now in the hands of Fox and Bryan Singer on moving forward with that decision.

Pretty much.

 

[GoodYoung]

Luckily the opinions of the Avengers film are in the smallest of minorities so they're not really relevant.

you're among a tiny set of people who was not able to find the "spectacle" in the movie

TSo again, that's why your comments are in the relatively obscure minority.

Are you really trying to use this as an argument? Seriously?

Some of us are discerning enough to realize that lathering on mellow drama
doesn't make a film more intriguing, and that humor and wit is not a sign of weakness, but intelligence.

In my eyes there is more value in a taught, uplifting and enjoyable film, full of wit and strong character dynamics, than one full of gushing, angsty cyphers speechifying and dealing out heavy handed allegorical pontification. And speechifying to clarify the plot.

Saying The Avengers sucks because it isn't dark or gloomy is like saying that The Beatles suck because they don't write De-tuned Late 90s Nu Metal music for angry teenagers to slit their wrist to.

An uplifting, enjoyable, snappy tone doesn't automatically make something a stupid Michael Bay movie. Tell that to Indiana Jones or Star Wars.

I'm not saying it's bad because it's not dark and realistic. I'm saying it's average because it's a really forgetable movie with annoying jokes, poorly written characters and bad acting.